The move, led by President Nancy Pelosi, seeks to draw a sharp contrast between the parties over health care, a key concern in the 2020 election that has become even more pressing amid the coronavirus pandemic.
“It was wrong at any time,” the California Democrat said of the administration’s stance. “Now, it’s more than stupid.”
Additionally, it would allow more middle-class people to receive help by removing the current eligibility limit of four times the poverty level, or approximately $ 50,000 a year for an individual and $ 103,000 for a family of four.
These provisions are similar to those pushed by former Vice President Joe Biden, the alleged Democratic presidential candidate.
The House is expected to vote on the bill early next week, but even House of Representatives drug pricing legislation will not go through the Republican-led Senate.
The drug bill tries to attract more states to expand Medicaid to low-income adults by covering 100% of the cost for the first three years. This provision reflects that of the Affordable Care Act, which paid the total cost initially and was later reduced to 90% coverage. About 14 states have not yet expanded Medicaid.
Legislation also requires extending Medicaid or Children’s Health Insurance Program coverage to new mothers for one year after birth to help combat maternal mortality.
It would also reverse various moves made by the Trump administration to weaken the law. The House bill calls for the duration of the short-term plans, which the administration had extended to just under a year, to be shortened, and for marketing funds and enrollment assistance to be reinstated during the reporting period. Obamacare annual enrollment.
The legislation introduced Wednesday would reduce the number of uninsured Americans by an average of 4 million between 2022 and 2030, according to estimates by the Congressional Budget Office.
Supreme court fight
The Justice Department has also recently argued that the entire law should fall, but the ruling should apply only to the 18 states that challenged it.
The House and a coalition of Democratic attorneys general are defending the law. A federal appeals court held in December that the mandate was unconstitutional, but asked a district court to consider whether the entire law should be invalidated.
.
